Format of the Final Four

[Midwest12]

Why not just make it simple, merge the MIVA and EIVA?
Than take 4 teams from that conference and 4 teams from the West Coast Conference?

[in the know]

Don't think that merging some of the Div I MIVA teams and some Div I EIVA teams is not being discussed among some schools in the conference.

[vballmom]

That would be interesting. Would you merge just the D-I schools or merge all of the teams in the conference? If you only take the D-I and strong D-II schools, what happens to the rest of them?

[Rollshot]

The biggest obstacle to expanding the current NCAA tournament format is, as someone mentioned, the NCAA itself. Why would (or should) they put more money into a sport that is losing money for all concerned?

So, how do you get the NCAA to adopt a new format without impacting the NCAA too much? Well, the natural answer is the individual conferences or schools would have to spend more. What do I mean?

Currently, each of the conference tournament champions (MIVA, EIVA, MPSF) get automatic bids to the NCAA tournament (which is essentially the Final Four, the phrase btw belongs to NCAA basketball) and the NCAA committee (I forget who belongs to this committee) picks one at-large team, usually someone from the MPSF. This format reduces the headache for the NCAA and minimizes expenses.

How do you set up an expanded tournament which minimizes the headache of the NCAA? Well, the 3 conferences can set up a national championship tournament with regionals and subregionals (depending on how many teams make it) but those matches would have to be funded by the MIVA, EIVA, MPSF, and the individual schools. But when the tournament is played out and only 4 teams remain, these 4 teams advance to the official NCAA championships (and paid for by the NCAA). Mind you, the NCAA would have to agree to take these final 4 instead of the traditional MIVA, EIVA, MPSF winners plus one at-large.

You're probably asking, well, rollshot, we already have a tournament before the NCAA tournament. Those are called the conference tournaments -- EIVA, MIVA, and MPSF! Why have a separate tournament?

The answer is, those tournaments involve teams playing other teams within the same conference. MIVA teams play MIVA teams, EIVA teams play EIVA teams, and MPSF teams play MPSF teams. The beauty of a "national" tournament is to see MIVA #1 play MPSF #8, for example; or MPSF #1 play EIVA #7. We all hope and dream the NCAA could set that up, much like they do in basketball, soccer, and baseball. But they don't.

We can set up our own postseason (post-conference and pre-NCAA tournament) tournament. We can set up a tournament of 8 teams (4 MPSF, 2 MIVA, 2 EIVA, as someone suggested), or 12 teams (1st round bye for top 4 seeds, remaining 8 seeds play single elimination), or 16 teams, or whatever the number we want. Once the seedings and pairings have been set up, the teams play each other until only 4 teams remain. The NCAA guys then "invite" these 4 teams to play in their tournament. Ta-da!

Of course, this format requires the cooperation of the NCAA (they need to pick our final 4), the individual conferences, and the individual schools. It's more money being spent by the conferences and the individual schools, and they may not want to be in further debt. But theoretically, I don't see a reason why this format (or any other format we choose to narrow down the field to 4 teams) can't be implemented. Could we get the NCAA's cooperation? That's the easy part. They don't care enough about men's volleyball to veto such an idea. The NCAA will cooperate with the MIVA, EIVA, and MPSF. Right now, if the NCAA wanted to pick 4 random teams regardless of their finish in the individual conference tournaments, they could. But they don't. Out of respect for the conferences, they pick the conference champions.

So, let's play it out using Coach McGuirk's example:

#1 Pepperdine MPSF Champ vs #8 George Mason EIVA at large
Site: Pepperdine
Result: Pepp beats GMU

#4 Lewis MIVA Champ vs #5 BYU MPSF at large
Site: Lewis
Result: BYU beats Lewis

#3 Penn State EIVA Champ vs #6 Pacific at large
Site: Penn State
Result: Penn State beats Pacific

#2 Hawaii MPSF runnerup/at large vs #7 Loyola-Chicago MIVA at large
Site: Hawaii
Result: Hawaii beats Loyola-Chicago

Final Four: #1 Pepperdine, #2 Hawaii, #3 Penn State, and #5 BYU
These 4 teams get "invites" to the NCAA tournament.

Alternatively, the 8 teams could all gather in one location, say Malibu, or the site of this year's NCAA tournament, the Pyramid at Long Beach. So, when the 4 teams advance, they don't have to go very far to continue playing in the NCAA.

Obviously, variations of this idea could work. The MIVA, EIVA, and MPSF could dispense with their conference tournaments altogether and set up this pre-NCAA super tournament consisting of the top teams from each conference. But once the tournament is played out and 4 teams remain, these 4 advance to the official NCAA championships.

So, what we essentially get is a big national championship tournament sponsored by the individual conferences and schools and when it gets whittled down to 4 teams, the NCAA sponsors it. It just needs the cooperation of the NCAA, the individual conferences, and the individual schools. More money will be spent, but you're not going to get quality unless you pay for it. The NCAA won't move so we have to somehow accommodate the NCAA's format.

The bottom line is, the men's volleyball community can set up whatever format they want right now! All they need is for the NCAA to cooperate and pick the final 4 teams that the men's vb community picked. As for expenses, hopefully such a funding by individual schools won't impact the number of scholarships and such. After all, the AD is gonna ask, "Hey coach, I like the expanded tournament idea but I only have X number of dollars for men's volleyball. We're taking 1.5 scholarships away from you so that you can fly your team to Long Beach for this pre-NCAA tournament."

When your sport is not a revenue generator, you don't really have much leverage.

[NET2]

If you want an 8 team national tourney you will have to help the NCAA find some sponsor $. Unlike the women's NCAA tourney, the men's has not had sponsorship for a couple years. It will take some $ to include 4 more teams.

[Jewel]

I thought the NCAA tournament had 64 teams?

[roy]

The problem with this is not convincing the MPSF teams to adopt this format but getting the EIVA and MIVA to agree to this. While some would surely welcome the opportunity to play in a men's NCAA tournament, they also know that they will have to go through one more MPSF team to try to reach the Final Four.

[Rollshot]

Let's assume you are right, roy, for the sake of argument.

If, as you say, some of the EIVA and MIVA teams are so petty that they favor the current format (which increases their chances of getting to the final four) over an expanded format (which, arguably, decreases their chances), then men's volleyball in the east and midwest deserves to die. If they can't see that they will also benefit from the expanded format because volleyball itself will benefit, then the NCAA is not volleyball's main obstacle. Mens volleyball's main enemy is the men's volleyball community itself.

The issue boils down to: (1) Is it better for men's volleyball to showcase itself through a good cross-section of the country, i.e., make sure 50% of the teams in the final four are in the east and midwest, not just out west. Or, (2) Is it better for men's volleyball to showcase the best teams in the nation, regardless of geography?

We currently have #1 where the NCAA picks 2 MPSF, 1 MIVA, and 1 EIVA. The NCAA won't budge. They won't change. Men's vb is spiralling down (or has it already reached a valley which they can't climb out of?).

People have lobbied for the geography-centric format like we have now for the sake of increasing vb exposure. It's for the good of vb, they argue. Well, you know what, it's not really working and no matter what format you come up with, men's vb won't improve any unless it starts making money. I won't get into a Title IX debate because, frankly, it's tiring.